It really is amazing how stupid the British have let themselves become. That entire country is a complete surveillance society, people can't
even defend themselves, and while a dude gets his head hacked off in broad daylight the only thing bystanders can do is sit and watch. Pathetic.

It's like they got every male Englishmen on a straight drip of estrogen. The men over there..... my god.... they all wear panties....

And everyone else in England is PC to the bone. Hilarious to read the posts in this thread. Especially the people saying that the guy did this because
he is a black Muslim, who feels like an outcast because white people don't like him.... What the hell? He just hacked a dudes head off and it's the
white males of England who are responsible for that? You guys have no original thought at all, I've heard the same stupid argument come out of every
mentally challenged politicians mouth before all of you said it. You're all just parrots. And you think you're safer without the ability to defend
yourself.

What a sad little country England is....

You have no idea what you're talking about.

What a disgusting, abhorrent, ignorant post and what an inappropriate, inconsiderate time to post it. People risked their lives just to stop those two
idiots from further mutilating the corpse. And you have the nerve to pull this tough guy, I'm so down to earth, xenophobic act. Get a grip, and
consider leaving off this forum if hate and suppressed self-loathing is all you have to offer.

My main concern is how much people are believing as soon as they hear it, then switching their belief once they hear something more suitable to their
real of perceived normality so to speak. Indeed, the "sane" do love their scapegoats and their Two Minutes Hate.
much super-strength lager will be quaffed tonight, Methinks

From the very beginning I have been rather on the fence. that is as it should be, we are here to promote "Insanity" and "Unreason", after all.

Going on forward due to data compiled by those you speak of we shall point out a few things. Proceed with confidence, The C.U.T. has your back
Thunder and lightning here, if I disappear my power went out

good to know, As Sister Natalia (First Maenad) would be quite cross if I mobilized Her and her Murder of Crows due to a
misunderstanding. should an attack be carried out upon Your Person under cover of darkness I Am confident that a single swing of your Morningstar will
expedite the matter promptly, along with the adjacent 20 city blocks.

Quite frankly, that's bollocks, what happened here was not a war zone, and these guys knew they had the upper hand on a single individual,

The time to fight is when you have the upper hand.

Who defines the war zone?

Do you let the enemy set the time and place of the battle?

I was just trying to point out that all killing is bad. It's humorous to think that this kill is good, but that kill is bad. Especially, killing being
good when you have the advantage, but bad when the opponent has the advantage, being even more hilarious.

The real puzzle is why would a British man "identify" with people "over there", wherever he imagines over there to be, in his mind, to see himself as
one of the opponents of the British army, and thus feel the need to bring the battle to the streets of Britain, to turn it into a part of the war
zone.

If some foreigner "sneaked into" the country, we could understand. But, what has British society done to that man that he should feel so detached from
where he is, and connected to where is is not, that he would take it upon himself to join the battle for people he doesn't even know?

I couldn't think of a better way to spark some anti-muslim sentiment amongst unemployed British youth.

Think about it, a regular military man wearing a charity T-shirt is hacked to death in the middle of the street in broad day light by 2 middle eastern
people chanting on about Allah.

All the needed was a dead puppy and an old aged pensioner stuck in the boot of the car they'd have offended most demographics.

As for the financial hubs, comms and electricity hubs im not talking about internal workers.

If you wanted to destroy a nation and bring it to its knee's, you had a couple of car bombs and a massive truck bomb what would you hit?

a market full of innocent people or a electricity plant / financial centre?

Why did the 'supposid' terrorists attack the WTC/Pentagon on 911 and not a nuclear/power plant or wall street?

I safely assume the "terrorists" that committed 9/11 attacks didn't really want to destroy important American infrastructure (power plants, phone
comms) .. but why? seems odd to me how about you 8d?

back on topic - I am trying to stay tuned in to this situaton in woolwich but i only have the BBCAmerica channel which ironically enough seems to be
playing a movie titled "Apocalypto". If any brits have some new information perhaps regarding the Cabinet meeting i would be more than interested to
read up on it, also can anyone confirm mosque attacks since the melee in the streets? saw a twitter post about it but i take with a grain of salt

They kill each other. I am tired of hearing this excuse. The US 'should' bring the boys back home and let these backward radicals destroy themselves
once and for.

Syria is dropping chemical weapons on it's own people. Last time I check Hezbollah were killing themselves in suicide bombings. It is Genocide in
Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Yemen...so enough with the America is killing everyone. If we pulled out, they would still kil each other. Look
at those numbers.

The US has not killed 200k in Iraq..civilians...nope...they are killing each other. Sunni and Shia...around since the KOran was written in 632
AD....enough

The UK is much safer than crazy America. I'd rather live permanently in the UK than in the US. It is a statistical fact that the more guns that are
available, the more gun-related incidents there will be. We'd have more attacks, more suicides, more murders.

Personally, I've never felt the need to carry a deadly weapon. Legalizing guns in the UK would only lead to a mini-arms race. I've escaped a couple
of knife-point robberies without the use of a gun, thank you very much - we don't want to turn into Wild West "Merica.

You have to be kidding? People in UK don't have guns so they use machetes and hack each other up in a most rude and bizarre fashion. And you think
it's better why?

That may be,and tommorow it maybe some loony who does it in the name of stale Oreo cookies.
Point being,Nuts are always gonna find some reason to satisfy their urge to wanna take human lives.

There is NO WAY to prevent horrible things like this from never happening.
But people can try to restrain themselves from painting people of a race/religion with broad stroke,cause of the acts of 2 people today.

The little to no coverage of this by mainstream media in the States proves US media, and in turn, the public are just a country of self-centered
douches; when something happens in the States (no matter how minor) we make it a global news event, but when something truly horrific occurs elsewhere
we basically ignore it. It really is a disgusting pattern of behavior.

Our collective American hypocrisy is baffling, when it happens here the media shapes the mouth breathing public to be are outraged, bloodthirsty and
the coverage essentially makes them feel like they were a victim of the incident. Then these tubes want new laws and are happy to give up their civil
liberties because it is easier for them to place the blame on entire groups of people or inanimate objects than to accept that there are people who
are evil in, not only far off places, but in their own backyards. Furthermore, here in the US when no media coverage is given to such things as our
own government's actions resulting in loss of many, many innocent lives; it causes people have to have no understanding of global affairs and
disbelief at the notion that anyone would want to harm America for perceived atrocities.

Originally posted by Rocker2013
Okay, this is starting to look a little more concerning now...

Nick Raynsford MP for Greenwich and Woolwich is telling LBC that he has spoken to a senior officer at the nearby barracks and the victim is a serving
soldier.

I know this is concerning from a national security standpoint if this does turn out to be religiously motivated terrorism, but I am actually more
scared of the backlash against this and the potential for our country to lurch to the extreme right as a result of it.

I hope it does 'lurch' to the extreme right. This incident may be exactly what the Dr ordered to rid the UK (and the world) of these islamist rock
apes. They belong up trees, not walking around the streets of London or anywhere else.

Or are we forgeting the butchering of millions of muslims by christians

You need either a history lesson on the conquest by the Moors and the subsequent war between the Moors and the Christians who sought to retake the
land, or you need to take off the biased blinders.
It's not like the Moors didn't have those long swords or anything.

The Moors were the medieval Muslim inhabitants of Morocco, western Algeria, Western Sahara, Mauritania, the Iberian Peninsula, Septimania, Sicily
and Malta. The Moors called their Iberian territory Al-Andalus, an area comprising Gibraltar, much of what is now Spain and Portugal, and part of
France. There was also a Moorish presence in present-day southern Italy after they occupied Mazara in 827[1] until their last settlement of Lucera was
destroyed in 1300. The religious difference of the Moorish Muslims led to a centuries-long conflict with the Christian kingdoms of Europe called the
Reconquista. The Fall of Granada in 1492 saw the end of the Muslim rule in Iberia.

Today you can still find hotels by the name of Al-Andalus in Tunisia, and more specifically in the Sousse region. In fact I stayed in one.

With enormous energy, the warriors of Islam struck out against the Christians shortly after Mohammed's death. They were extremely successful.
Palestine, Syria, and Egypt—once the most heavily Christian areas in the world—quickly succumbed. By the eighth century, Muslim armies had
conquered all of Christian North Africa and Spain. In the eleventh century, the Seljuk Turks conquered Asia Minor (modern Turkey), which had been
Christian since the time of St. Paul. The old Roman Empire, known to modern historians as the Byzantine Empire, was reduced to little more than
Greece. In desperation, the emperor in Constantinople sent word to the Christians of western Europe asking them to aid their brothers and sisters in
the East.
That is what gave birth to the Crusades. They were not the brainchild of an ambitious pope or rapacious knights but a response to more than four
centuries of conquests in which Muslims had already captured two-thirds of the old Christian world. At some point, Christianity as a faith and a
culture had to defend itself or be subsumed by Islam. The Crusades were that defense.

Pope Urban II called upon the knights of Christendom to push back the conquests of Islam at the Council of Clermont in 1095. The response was
tremendous. Many thousands of warriors took the vow of the cross and prepared for war. Why did they do it? The answer to that question has been badly
misunderstood. In the wake of the Enlightenment, it was usually asserted that Crusaders were merely lacklands and ne'er-do-wells

During the past two decades, computer-assisted charter studies have demolished that contrivance. Scholars have discovered that crusading knights
were generally wealthy men with plenty of their own land in Europe. Nevertheless, they willingly gave up everything to undertake the holy mission.
Crusading was not cheap. Even wealthy lords could easily impoverish themselves and their families by joining a Crusade. They did so not because they
expected material wealth (which many of them had already) but because they hoped to store up treasure where rust and moth could not corrupt

The second goal was the liberation of Jerusalem and the other places made holy by the life of Christ. The word crusade is modern. Medieval
Crusaders saw themselves as pilgrims, performing acts of righteousness on their way to the Holy Sepulcher. The Crusade indulgence they received was
canonically related to the pilgrimage indulgence

The reconquest of Jerusalem, therefore, was not colonialism but an act of restoration and an open declaration of one's love of God.

Self loathing? Do you moonlight as a shrink or something? All you can do is call me a self loathing xenophobe? Not surprising, because that's all you
got. Reminds of of how every time someone speaks the truth about Obama, they get called a racist. Doesn't take a lot of grey matter to call a person
a xenophobe, it does take a lot to re-evaluate the situation you are in, and how you got there.

Besides, you said it yourself, they rushed in to stop someone from desecrating a corpse, they did not rush in to save a life. How courageous, that out
of a crowd of people, only a few ran in, but only after it was all over..

1st Cav Division claimed 137k kills in 2004-2005 in Iraq. That was from the 3 brigades on the ground at the time. It doesn't include other assets in
theater and it doesn't include those killed by insurgents. Our Division Sergeant Major got up in front of all of us and congratulated us on a job
well done before we left country. I was there, I earned my combat spurs during that deployment.

OT -

This isn't about Iraq/Afghanistan
It not about is Islam is a religion of peace
It has $^%* all to do with America in any way. Especially our laws and rights

Two men killed another person. They did it in broad daylight in front of witnesses. This is a serious game changer. It could signal the end of
coordinated, planned, well executed (for the most part) terrorist attacks. Planned chaos without a head to remove. That should scare the hell out of
everyone regardless of beliefs, country, race, or religion.

Self loathing? Do you moonlight as a shrink or something? All you can do is call me a self loathing xenophobe? Not surprising, because that's all you
got. Reminds of of how every time someone speaks the truth about Obama, they get called a racist. Doesn't take a lot of grey matter to call a person
a xenophobe, it does take a lot to re-evaluate the situation you are in, and how you got there.

Besides, you said it yourself, they rushed in to stop someone from desecrating a corpse, they did not rush in to save a life. How courageous, that out
of a crowd of people, only a few ran in, but only after it was all over..

Allow me to play devils advocate regarding the questioning of the levels of braveness shown by those in the area.. If i'm not mistaken this took
place right next to or within an earshot of an elementary school for children? If so, an assumption could be made that those present were mothers or
fathers dropping off/visiting/picking up their children. If this is plausible I would wager to think they weighed the likelihood of them helping the
most likely deceased individual at that time or staying alive to provide for their children. I do take my hat off for the few women who were brave
enough to shelter that poor young man from further violence to his temple, but I must stress that not everyone believes they have a human obligation
to help in times of crisis -- a lot of people are cowards, inept or struck by fear. just my .02

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.